Rating videos based on parental feedback

ABSTRACT

Systems and methods for rating videos based on parental feedback are presented. In an aspect, a method is provided that includes providing supervisory users respectively having a supervisory role over other users access to watch histories of respective ones of the other users and receiving feedback from the supervisory users regarding appropriateness of a video for the other users, respectively. The method further includes determining an age rating for the media item based on an average age of the other users that the feedback indicates the video is appropriate for, and recommending the video to a user for watching based on the user having an age that satisfies the age rating.

PRIORITY CLAIM

This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent ApplicationNo. 61/972,849 filed on Mar. 31, 2014, and entitled “RATING VIDEOS BASEDON PARENTAL FEEDBACK.” The entirety of the aforementioned application isincorporated by reference herein.

TECHNICAL FIELD

This application generally relates to systems and methods for ratingvideos based on parental feedback regarding the videos.

BACKGROUND

Conventionally, broadcast media has been provided by television or cablechannels that are typically provided by a relatively small number ofcontent providers. Broadcast media is rated for appropriateness forcertain audiences based on various governmental standards. For example,the United States employs rating and classification standards inaccordance with the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). TheMPAA rating and classification system classifies videos with a rating ofG where the video is considered appropriate for general audiences, arating of PG where parental guidance is suggested, a rating of PG-13where some material is considered inappropriate for children under theage of 13, and a rating of R where children under the age of 17 shouldbe accompanied by a parent or guardian. The standards implemented bybroadcast media are designed to capture the general opinion of thepopulous. Video ratings are needed to facilitate parents with monitoringtheir children's safety and well being in association with viewing mediacontent.

With the ubiquitous nature of media creation and publishing tools,individuals are able to become prolific content creators. This hasresulted in the exponential growth of available streaming content aswell as available channels for streaming content. The proliferation ofavailable streaming content is increasing at exponential levels thatwill soon reach many millions if not billions of available streamingcontent for viewing. The ability to manually review and provide accurateand meaningful ratings of such large amounts of streaming content isextremely difficult. Accordingly, machine learning systems that analyzevideo content and associated metadata have been implemented toautomatically rate streaming media content. However these machinelearning systems generally provide broad ratings that give parentsinsufficient guidance when monitoring their children's mediaconsumption.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Numerous aspects, embodiments, objects and advantages of the presentinvention will be apparent upon consideration of the following detaileddescription, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, inwhich like reference characters refer to like parts throughout, and inwhich:

FIG. 1 illustrates an example system for rating media items based onparental feedback in accordance with various aspects and embodimentsdescribed herein;

FIG. 2 illustrates an example user interface that facilitates receivingparental review of media items associated with a child of the parent inaccordance with various aspects and embodiments described herein;

FIG. 3 illustrates another example system for rating media items basedon parental feedback in accordance with various aspects and embodimentsdescribed herein;

FIG. 4 illustrates another example user interface that facilitatesreceiving parental review of media items associated with a child of theparent in accordance with various aspects and embodiments describedherein;

FIG. 5 illustrates another example system for rating media items basedon parental feedback in accordance with various aspects and embodimentsdescribed herein;

FIG. 6 illustrates another example system for rating media items basedon parental feedback in accordance with various aspects and embodimentsdescribed herein;

FIG. 7 illustrates another example system for rating media items basedon parental feedback in accordance with various aspects and embodimentsdescribed herein;

FIG. 8 illustrates another example system for rating media items basedon parental feedback in accordance with various aspects and embodimentsdescribed herein;

FIG. 9 is a flow diagram of an example method for rating media itemsbased on parental feedback, in accordance with aspects described herein;

FIG. 10 is a flow diagram of another example method for rating mediaitems based on parental feedback, in accordance with aspects describedherein;

FIG. 11 is a flow diagram of another example method for rating mediaitems based on parental feedback, in accordance with aspects describedherein;

FIG. 12 is a schematic block diagram illustrating a suitable operatingenvironment in accordance with various aspects and embodiments.

FIG. 13 is a schematic block diagram of a sample-computing environmentin accordance with various aspects and embodiments.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The innovation is described with reference to the drawings, wherein likereference numerals are used to refer to like elements throughout. In thefollowing description, for purposes of explanation, numerous specificdetails are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding ofthis innovation. It may be evident, however, that the innovation can bepracticed without these specific details. In other instances, well-knownstructures and components are shown in block diagram form in order tofacilitate describing the innovation.

By way of introduction, the subject matter described in this disclosurerelates to systems and methods for rating videos based on parentalfeedback. In an aspect, a system and user interface is provided thatallows parents to review their children's watch history and providefeedback regarding videos watched by their children. For example, aparent can rate a video viewed by her child and provide feedbackregarding her interpretation of appropriateness of the video for herchild. The appropriateness can be based on various factors including butnot limited to, the child's age, gender, ethnicity, culture, religion,or educational level.

The feedback can vary in descriptiveness. For example, the feedback caninclude a simple thumbs up indicating the parent considers the videoappropriate or thumbs down indicating the parent considers the videoinappropriate. In another example, the feedback can include a score thatreflects a degree to which the parent considers the video appropriatefor her child and whether she would recommend the video to another childsimilar to her child (e.g., in age, gender, ethnicity, educationallevel, etc.). In yet another example, the feedback can include adetailed analysis of why the parent considers the video appropriate orinappropriate for her child.

In an aspect, the system uses parental feedback to enhance granularityof content ratings. For example, based on feedback from multiple parentsregarding appropriateness of a video for children of various ages, thesystem can associate a rating with the video that reflects a degree ofappropriateness of the video for children of a specific age or agerange. According to this example, rather than associating a video with abroad rating of G, PG, P-13, or R, the system can specifically indicatean age or age range that the video is appropriate for (e.g., 3-5 yearsold). The system can also associate statistical information with thevideo that describes why the video has a certain rating based on datacollected and analyzed from the sampled set of parental reviewers. Forexample, the statistical information can indicate a distribution of thesampled reviewers that consider the video appropriate or inappropriatefor a certain age. The statistical information can also group differentreviewers by type characteristics and indicate how the different groupsrate the video. For example, a group of parents classified asconservative may rate a video differently than a group of parentsclassified as liberal.

The disclosed systems facilitate a constant feedback loop where inputfrom parents and their kids age/demographics can be used to train andimprove machine learning models for content rating. By crowd sourcingcontent rating input from parents, a higher degree of content ratingpersonalization can be achieved over automated content rating user audioand video analysis mechanisms. For a specific video, rich informationcan be gathered that reflects aspects of the video content andcharacteristics of users that the video is considered appropriate orinappropriate for. As a result, correlations can be established betweenvideos having certain characteristics and children having certaincharacteristics. This information can not only facilitate rating videosbut recommending videos to other users.

It should be appreciated that although aspects of the disclosed subjectmatter are described with respect to parents reviewing contentassociated with children (e.g., users under the ages of 18), thedisclosed systems and methods are not so limited. In particular, thedisclosed techniques can be applied to facilitate content rating andrecommendation based on review of the content by any user regardingappropriateness of the content for another user. For example, aprofessor can review content for appropriateness with respect to hisstudents or a company supervisor can review a workplace instructionalvideo regarding appropriateness of the video for potential employees.Accordingly, where aspects of the disclosed subject matter are describedwith respect to “parental feedback” of content associated with a child,is should be appreciated that reference to a “parent” and a “child” canencompass user relationships that involve any suitable user having asupervisory role over another user.

In one or more aspects, a system is provided that includes an interfacecomponent configured to provide a user interface that allows a firstuser to provide feedback regarding endorsement, by the first user, ofvideos watched by a second user. The system further includes an accesscomponent configured to provide the first user access, via the userinterface, to a watch history of the second user, wherein the watchhistory includes one or more videos watched by the second user, a reviewcomponent configured to receive, in response to input at the userinterface, feedback from the first user regarding endorsement, by thefirst user, of a video included in the watch history of the second user,and a general rating component configured to determine an age rating forthe video based on an age of the second user and the feedback. Thesystem further includes a recommendation component configured torecommend the video to a third user for watching based on the age ratingand an age of the third user. In various embodiments, the system canalso include a personalized rating component configured to determine apersonalized rating for the video that reflects a degree ofappropriateness of the video for viewing by a third user based on thefeedback, a profile of the third user, and a profile of the second user.

In another aspect, a method is disclosed that includes using a processorto execute the following computer executable instructions stored in amemory to perform various acts. These act can include but are notlimited to, providing a user interface that allows a first user toprovide feedback regarding endorsement, by the first user, of videoswatched by a second user, and providing the first user access, via theuser interface, to a watch history of the second user, wherein the watchhistory includes one or more videos watched by the second user. Theseacts can further include receiving, in response to input at the userinterface, feedback from the first user regarding endorsement, by thefirst user, of a video included in the watch history of the second user,and determining an age rating for the video based on an age of thesecond user and the feedback.

Further provided is a tangible computer-readable storage mediumcomprising computer-readable instructions that, in response toexecution, cause a computing system to perform various operations. Theseoperations include providing supervisory users respectively having asupervisory role over other users access to watch histories ofrespective ones of the other users, receiving feedback from thesupervisory users regarding appropriateness of a video for the otherusers, respectively, determining an age rating for the media item basedon an average age of the other users that the feedback indicates thevideo is appropriate for, and recommending the video to a user forwatching based on the user having an age that satisfies the age rating.

The subject systems and methods for automatically generating mediacontent ratings provide significant improvements over manual contentrating and existing automated machine based media content ratingtechnologies. In particular, one clear advantage with this method isthat it allows for higher degree of personalization. Existing machinebased content rating systems only allow for personalization to certainage ranges (e.g., 3-5 yrs age). However, the subject systems and methodsextend beyond age based personalization to allow for age basedpersonalization on a much more granular level (e.g., 1 yrs, 13 months,16, months, 8 years and 7 months, 16 years and 1 month, etc.), andpersonalization on several additional levels pertaining to eachindividual. For example, rather than receiving a recommendation of avideo considered appropriate for a child based solely on his age, therecommendation can be based on appropriateness/suitability for the childbased on a variety of other characteristics about the child (e.g.,gender, ethnicity, education, family values, religion, language, etc.),and characteristics about the parent of the child (e.g., family values,religion, conservative vs. liberal, etc.).

It is to be appreciated that unlike media recommendation systems thatrecommend content to users based on a determination that other similarusers have accessed or watched the media item and/or that a recommendedmedia item is similar to a previously watched media item, the subjectsystems and methods determine a personalized suitability/appropriatenessrating of a video for a user based on collective or crowd sourcedreviews of appropriateness/suitability of the media item for manydifferent users (e.g., children) of associated with a variety ofdifferent personal factor combination (e.g., (e.g., differentcombinations of age, gender, ethnicity, education, family values,religion, language, etc.).

Furthermore, disclosed techniques for generating content rating do notdescribe an abstract concept, such as a fundamental economic practice, amethod of organizing human activity, an idea itself (standing alone), ora mathematical relationship. In contrast, the subject systems andprocesses are directed to an automated method for generating contentratings for media items that are accessed and watched using an Internetbased content delivery platform. In order to obtain information toperform the rating computations, the system requires generation andprovision of a user interface that is accessed by an Internet basedplatform and enables user access to information held on a server deviceand required for viewing by the users in order for the users to theprovide feedback. Further, the system employs the user interface toenable reception of user feedback input and thus enables reception ofthe information used to perform the rating computations. As can beappreciated by those skilled in the art as well as those unskilled inthe art, the above described concepts are inextricably rooted inInternet based computer technology in order to overcome a problem (e.g.,automatically determining media content appropriateness ratings)specifically arising in the realm of computer networks (e.g., providingaccurate and meaningful ratings of the constant and exponential influxof media content that is being made available for streaming via theInternet).

Referring now to the drawings, with reference initially to FIG. 1,presented is diagram of an example system 100 for rating content basedon parental feedback, in accordance with various aspects and embodimentsdescribed herein. Aspects of systems, apparatuses or processes explainedin this disclosure can constitute machine-executable components embodiedwithin machine(s), e.g., embodied in one or more computer readablemediums (or media) associated with one or more machines. Suchcomponents, when executed by the one or more machines, e.g.,computer(s), computing device(s), virtual machine(s), etc. can cause themachine(s) to perform the operations described.

System 100 includes media provider 102, client device 118 and one ormore networks 116 for connecting media provider 102 and client device118. Media provider 102 can include an entity configured to providestreaming media (e.g., video or audio) to a client device 118 via anetwork 116. Media provider 102 includes parental control platform 104to facilitate enabling users to provide feedback regardingappropriateness of media content for another user. For example, parentalcontrol platform 104 can allow a first user to rate (or describe) avideo (or a song, a channel, an animation, etc.) regarding how the firstuser personally considers the video appropriate or inappropriate foranother user (e.g., a specifically identified real user or ahypothetical user), based on the other one or more characteristics ofthe other user. Such characteristics can include but are not limited to,the other user's, age, gender, ethnicity, religion, culture, educationallevel, subject matter expertise, occupation, preferences, interests,location or context.

Parental control platform 104 can include memory 114 for storingcomputer executable components and instructions. Parental controlplatform 104 can further include a processor 112 to facilitate operationof the instructions (e.g., computer executable components andinstructions) by parental control platform 104. It is to be appreciatedthat although parental control platform 104 is illustrated as being acomponent internal to media provider 102, such implementation is not solimited. For example, parental control platform 104 (and/or one or morecomponents of parental control platform 104) can be included in clientdevice 118, another content server, a cloud, and/or a media player.

Media provider 102 can include an entity that provides media content(e.g., video, streaming video, live streaming video, images, thumbnailsor other static representations of video) to a client device 118 via anetwork 116 (e.g., the Internet). Client device 118 can includepresentation component 120 to generate a user interface (e.g., agraphical user interface or virtual interface) that displays mediacontent provided by media provider 102 to a user of the client device.In an aspect, presentation component 120 can include an application(e.g., a web browser) for retrieving, presenting and traversinginformation resources on the World Wide Web. For example, media provider102 can provide and/or present media content to a client device 118 viaa website that can be accessed using a browser of the client device 118.In another example, media provider 102 can provide and/or present mediacontent to a client device 118 via a cellular application platform.According to this application, presentation component 120 can employ aclient application version of the media provider that 102 that canaccess the cellular application platform of media provider 102. In anaspect, the media content can be presented and/or played at clientdevice 118 using a video player associated with media provider 102and/or client device 118.

As used herein the term media content or media item can include but isnot limited to streamable media (e.g., video, live video, videoadvertisements, music, music videos, sound files and etc.) and staticmedia (e.g., pictures, thumbnails). In some aspects, the term mediacontent or media item includes a collection of media items such as aplaylist including several videos or songs, or a channel includingseveral videos or songs associated with a single media creator.

A channel can be data content available from a common source or datacontent having a common topic or theme. A channel can be associated witha curator who can perform management actions on the channel. Managementactions may include, for example, adding media items to the channel,removing media items from the channel, defining subscriptionrequirements for the channel, defining presentation attributes forchannel content, defining access attributes for channel content, etc.The channel content can be digital content uploaded to theinternet-based content platform by a channel curator and/or digitalcontent selected by a channel curator from the content available on theInternet-based content platform. A channel curator can be a professionalcontent provider (e.g., a professional content creator, a professionalcontent distributor, a content rental service, a television (TV)service, etc.) or an amateur individual. Channel content can includeprofessional content (e.g., movie clips, TV clips, music videos,educational videos) and/or amateur content (e.g., video blogging, shortoriginal videos, etc.). Users, other than the curator of the channel,can subscribe to one or more channels in which they are interested.

In an aspect, media provider 102 can employ one or more networkedcomputing devices to store media content and deliver media content tousers via a network 116. The media content can be stored in memory(e.g., memory 114) associated with media provider 102 and/or at variousnetworked devices employed by media provider 102 and accessed via clientdevice 118 using a web based platform of the media provider 102. Forexample, media provider 102 can include a media presentation source thathas access to a voluminous quantity (and potentially an inexhaustiblenumber) of shared media (e.g., video and/or audio) files. The mediapresentation source can further stream these media files to one or moreusers at respective client devices (e.g., client device 118) of the oneor more users over a network 116. In another example, media provider 102can include any entity that provides videos to users along with othercontent and services (e.g., a social networking website that providessocial networking services and social videos or an educational websitethat provides educational videos and services).

Client device 118 can include any suitable computing device associatedwith a user and configured to interact with media provider 102, and/orparental control platform 104. For example, client device 118 caninclude a desktop computer, a laptop computer, a television, an Internetenabled television, a mobile phone, a smartphone, a tablet personalcomputer (PC), or a personal digital assistant PDA. As used in thisdisclosure, the terms “content consumer” or “user” refer to a person,entity, system, or combination thereof that employs system 100 (oradditional systems described in this disclosure) using a client device118. Network(s) 116 can include wired and wireless networks, includingbut not limited to, a cellular network, a wide area network (WAD, e.g.,the Internet), a local area network (LAN), or a personal area network(PAN). For example, client device 118 can communicate with mediaprovider 102 (and vice versa) using virtually any desired wired orwireless technology, including, for example, cellular, WAN, wirelessfidelity (Wi-Fi), Wi-Max, WLAN, and etc. In an aspect, one or morecomponents of system 100 are configured to interact via disparatenetworks.

In accordance with one or more embodiments, to facilitate rating mediacontent based on parental feedback, parental control platform 104 caninclude access component 106, review component 108, interface component122, and general rating component 110. Access component 106 isconfigured to provide users associated with a supervisory role (e.g.,parents, teacher, etc.) with access to information regarding mediaconsumption by the users that they supervise. For example, accesscomponent 106 can provide parents with access to media watch history orconsumption information for their respective children. The respectiveparents can then review the media that their respective children havewatched of have selected for watching. Review component 108 isconfigured to receive feedback from a plurality of reviewers regardingtheir endorsement (e.g., their opinions of appropriateness) of mediaitems that the respective other users that have watched, or indicated adesire to watch. For example, the reviewers can include parents thatreview videos that their children (e.g., the reviewees) have watched orindicated a desire to watch. In an aspect, the feedback provided by theparent/reviewer can generally indicate whether the reviewer considersthe video appropriate for the reviewee. In another aspect, the feedbackcan provide a score (e.g., on a scale from 1 to 10, a 2/5 stars, oranother suitable scoring scale) that indicates a level ofappropriateness of the video for the reviewee. In some aspects, thereview component 108 can request the reviewer to provide feedbackregarding appropriateness of the video for the reviewee specifically inview of the reviewee's age or educational level. In other aspects,parental control platform 104 can assume that a review ofappropriateness of a video for a child/reviewee provided by aparent/reviewer inherently considers the child's age and/or educationallevel.

General rating component 110 is configured to determine or infer an ageappropriateness rating and/or an educational appropriateness rating toassociate with the a media item based on collective reviews received forthe media item. For example, general rating component 110 can analyzefeedback provided from respective parents of different childrenregarding appropriateness of the video for the different children,respectively, in view of the respective ages of the different childrenor the respective educational levels of the different children. Based onthe collective feedback, general rating component 110 can determine orinfer the most suitable age or age range for which the video isgenerally considered appropriate and/or the most suitable educationallevel or range for which the video is generally considered appropriate.

In an exemplary embodiment, access component 106 allows a first user,such as a parent, to access media that has been accessed by orrecommended to another user, such as the parent's child. For example, aparent can establish an account with media provider 102 that includesinformation related to personalized media consumption for the parentand/or the parent's child. The account can provide the parent access toa variety of information associated with the parent's child mediaconsumption via a user interface provided by interface component 122.For example, the account can allow the parent to review (e.g., watch,watch partially, read a synopsis, read user comments, etc.) videos thechild has watched, videos the child has requested to watch, videos thatthe child has been recommended to watch, videos that the child likes,channels the child has subscribed to, channels, the child has requestedto subscribe to, channels the child likes, etc. In an aspect, theaccount can also include or be associated with profile information forthe parent and/or the child that identifies at least a specific age oreducational level of the child.

For example, media provider 102 can employ a networked platform, such asa website or client application, that can be accessed via a network 116using a client device 118. The website or client application canprovide/configure a user interface (e.g., via interface component 122)that facilitates accessing the parent's account, accessing their child'swatch history, reviewing media items included in their child's watchhistory, and providing feedback for videos watched by the user regardingappropriateness of the respective videos for the user. The userinterface can be generated/presented at the client device 118 viapresentation component 120.

According to this embodiment, review component 108 can allow the parentto provide feedback regarding appropriateness of media contentassociated with the parent's child. For example, the parent can score avideo or channel that has been watched by or requested for watching bythe child to reflect a level of appropriateness the parent considers thevideo or channel for the child. In some aspects, the review component108 can explicitly request and receive feedback regarding whether theparent considers the video appropriate for the child in general. Inanother aspect, the review component 108 can request the reviewerprovide feedback regarding appropriateness of the video for the child inview of the child's specific age. In yet another aspect, the parent canscore a video or channel that has been watched by or requested forwatching by the child to reflect a level of appropriateness the parentconsiders the video or channel for the child based on the child'sspecific educational level.

The type feedback provided by a user (e.g., a parent) reviewing a mediaitem for appropriateness of consumption by another user (e.g., theparent's child) can vary. In an aspect, the feedback can include asimple yes or no type response. For example, a parent can provide inputthat indicates either yes the media item is appropriate for this user(e.g., in consideration of the user's age or educational level), or nothe media item is not appropriate for this user. For instance, theparent could select a widget on an interface that indicates “ageappropriate” or “not age appropriate.” As noted above the specific ageor educational level of the child can be determined based on a profileemployed by the parent and/or the child. However in other aspects, whenproviding feedback regarding appropriateness of the media item for hisor her child, the parent can indicate the child's specific age oreducational level.

In another aspect, feedback regarding appropriateness of a media itemfor another user can include a score that reflects a level or degree ofappropriateness. For example, rather than receiving a yes or no typeresponse, review component 108 can allow the reviewer to score the video(e.g., rate on a scale from 1 to 10 or another suitable scale) withrespect to a degree to which the reviewer considers a media itemappropriate or inappropriate for another user based on the other user'sage or educational level. In another aspect, feedback received by reviewcomponent 108 can also indicate why a reviewer considers content of amedia item appropriate or inappropriate for another user.

For example, review component 108 can facilitate reception of moregranular parental feedback regarding age appropriateness of a video forhis or her child with respect to specific characteristics of thecontent, such as violence, profanity, lewdness, etc. According to thisexample, review component 108 can provide the parent with a prompt thatallows the parent to indicate whether the parent considers the videoappropriate or inappropriate with respect to each characteristic. In anaspect, the prompt can allow the parent to provide an appropriatenessscore (e.g., rate on a scale from 1 to 10) that reflects a degree towhich the parent considers the video appropriate for the child withrespect to each characteristic. For example, a parent can rate a videowith a score of 2 for violence, 5 for profanity, 1 for lewdness, etc.,wherein a higher score indicates a higher degree of inappropriateness(e.g., 1=highly appropriate and 10=highly inappropriate). According tothis example, a video can have an overall appropriateness score on ascale of 3 to 30 based on the cumulative scores for each characteristic,wherein a higher score indicates a higher degree of inappropriateness.

With respect to educational videos, a reviewer can indicate that theparent considers the content to have a difficulty level beyond that ofher child or below that of her child's educational level. Feedback canalso include characteristics of another user that the reviewer wouldconsider a media item appropriate or inappropriate for. For example, areviewer can indicate that a video is appropriate for children betweenthe ages of 6 and 9 or for children who have taken advanced algebra. Inaddition, feedback received by review component 108 can relate toquality of a media item. In other aspects, feedback received by reviewcomponent 108 regarding a video watched by another user can reflect howthe other user enjoyed the video. For example, a parent can review avideo watched by her child and include information in a review thatindicates how well the child enjoyed the video.

In various embodiments, interface component 122 is configured to providea user interface that facilitates accessing user account information,reviewing their children's watch history, and providing feedbackregarding videos included in the children's watch history. The interfacecan be rendered at a client device 118 via presentation component 120.For example, in an aspect, presentation component 120 can include adisplay and a browser configured to access a website for the mediaprovider and render the interface(s) provided by the website (e.g., viainterface component 122). In an aspect, the interface can provide reviewoptions for a selected media item included in a child's watch historyaccessed by the user. For example, the user interface can at least allowa reviewer to view a watch history of another user (e.g., his or herchild), select a media item to review that is included in the watchhistory, and facilitate user input regarding appropriateness of themedia item for the other user. For example, the user interface can allowa reviewer to select a widget that indicates the reviewer approves ordisapproves of the video for watching by another user based on acharacteristic of the other user (e.g., the other user's age). Inanother example, the user interface can provide the reviewer with aprompt to score the video based on appropriateness of the video forwatching by another user.

FIG. 2 depicts an exemplary user interface 200 provided by interfacecomponent 122 that facilitates receiving review, by a parent, of mediaitems that have been accessed or may be accessed by a child of theparent. In particular, interface 200 depicts a user account or profilefor user “Erin” that facilitates navigating and consuming contentprovided by a streaming media provider (e.g., media provider 102). In anaspect, the profile allows Erin to tailor and save preferences andinformation regarding her media consumption at media provider. Forexample, the left side of the interface can include various menu optionsthat organize access to information regarding media Erin has consumed,media Erin has saved or created, and media that Erin has beenrecommended and media Erin has subscribed to.

In another aspect, the profile/account allows Erin to monitor and accessinformation regarding media consumption of another user at mediaprovider. In particular, the profile/account can include informationthat links Erin's profile/account to a profile/account for her childAlexander (e.g., or any other user that is supervised by Erin and/orauthorizes Erin access to his or her profile/account). According to thisaspect, via her profile/account, Erin can access information thatdescribes Alexander's media consumption profile via menu option“Alexander” 202 and sub-menu option “profile.” Erin can also provideinformation to describe Alexander via his profile. For example, Erin candescribe characteristics of Alexander, such as demographicalcharacteristics (e.g., age, gender, birthday, culture, religion,location, educational level, etc.) and preference characteristics (e.g.,content Alexander prefers, content inappropriate for Alexander, contentappropriate for Alexander, etc.) via his profile.

Via menu option “Alexander” 202, Erin can also navigate to sub-menuoptions “wish list,” “watch history” 204, and “recommended” to viewmedia items associated with the respective sub-menu categories. Forexample, selection of menu option “wish list” can generate a view ofmedia items that Alexander has marked as liked, favorited, saved, orrequested for viewing. Selection of menu option “watch history” 204 cangenerate a view of media items that Alexander has watched in the pastand selection of the menu option “recommended” can generate a view ofmedia items that Alexander has been recommended for watching by a mediacontent recommendation system employed by the media provider.

Interface 200 further allows Erin to provide feedback regarding mediaitems associated with respective sub-menu options “wish list,” “watchhistory” 204, and “recommended.” In particular, Erin can select a mediaitem associated with Alexander's wish list, watch history, or mediarecommendations and provide feedback for the media item with respect toher endorsement of Alexander's watching of the media item. For example,the feedback can indicate Erin's consideration of appropriateness of themedia item for Alexander with respect to his age or educational level.For example, Erin can view a video included in Alexander's wish listthat has heavy violence and vulgar music and mark the video asinappropriate for watching by Alexander. In an aspect, such factors forwhich Erin's basis her interpretation of appropriateness can beinferred. In another aspect, the factors can be stated or declared inassociation with her review (e.g., either by Erin or by review component108 in accordance with guided review of the video by review component108).

For example, as seen in interface 200, Erin has selected the “watchhistory” 204 sub-menu option that results in the display of media itemswatched by Alexander in section 206. Section 206 can include a list orgrid view of various media items (e.g., videos, channels, songs, etc.)watched or listened to by Alexander. Each of the media items can includevarious information associated therewith, such a thumbnail imagerepresenting the respective media items, a title associated with therespective media items, a date noting when Alexander watched therespective media items, number of view associated with the respectivemedia items, and a description of the respective media items. Inaddition, each of the media items can be associated with elements thatallow Erin to provide feedback regarding her endorsement of watching ofthe respective media items by Alexander. For example, each of the mediaitems can include an input widget 208 that allows Erin to mark a “checkbox” to indicate she considers the video appropriate for Alexander or an“X box to indicate she considers the video inappropriate for Alexander.

Each of the media items can also include a review button 210. In anaspect, selection of a review button 210 associated with a media itemcan allow Erin to provide a more granular review of the media item. Forexample, in response to selection of review button 210 for video 1, areview prompt can be generated that allows Erin to input variousinformation regarding appropriateness of video 1 for Alexander. In anaspect, the review prompt can include a survey with various questionsrelated to appropriateness of the video for Alexander. The questions canbe responded to via selection of a checkbox, filling in a score orrating, or providing a typographical response. For example, a survey forvideo 1 can include several questions related to how Erin would rate thevideo (e.g., on a scale of 1-10) for appropriateness for Alexander withrespect to violence, profanity, vulgarity, etc. In another example, asurvey for video 1 can include several questions related to how Erinwould rate the video (e.g., on a scale of 1-10) for appropriateness forAlexander with respect to each of the following categories: age, gender,ethnicity, religion, educational level, context, language, etc. Thesurvey can also include other questions that could facilitate rating thevideo or recommending the video to another user. For example, the surveycould prompt Erin to indicate characteristics of a hypothetical user(e.g., what age or age range, gender, educational level, etc.) sheconsiders the video appropriate for. The survey could also prompt Erinto indicate how she felt Alexander enjoyed the video. It should beappreciated that the various types of information that can be includedand received with a review regarding appropriateness of a video foranother user can vary and is not limited to the examples providedherein.

Referring back to FIG. 1, general rating component 110 is configured todetermine a general age rating or educational level rating for a mediaitem based on aggregate parental review feedback provided for the mediaitem. In particular, general rating component 110 can analyze parentalreview feedback for a media item received from a plurality of parents(or reviewers) regarding appropriateness of the video for a children ofvarious ages and/or educational levels. Based on the feedback, generalrating component 110 can determine or infer a rating to associate withthe media item that reflects the collective views of the parentsregarding appropriateness of the video for a user of a particular age oreducational level. For example, general rating component 110 candetermine a rating for a video that indicates the video is mostappropriate for users between the ages of 3 and 5, between the ages of14 and 15 or for a particular age such as 18 and above. In anotherexample, general rating component 110 can determine a rating for a videothat indicates the video is appropriate for users having an educationalgrade level of 8.

General rating component 110 can employ various statistical analysistools to facilitate determining an age or educational rating for a mediaitem. For example, rating component can analyze a large sample ofreviews and determine a mean age or age range the reviews consider themedia item appropriate for and/or inappropriate for. General ratingcomponent 110 can also apply threshold requirements with respect tosample size and sample distribution to facilitate determining orinferring an age or educational rating for a media item. For example,general rating component 110 can require a minimum sample size of N(e.g., where N is a suitable number). In another example, general ratingcomponent 110 can require a threshold percentage (e.g., 60%, 70%, 80%,90%, 95%, etc.) with respect to a percentage of the reviews thatconsider the media item appropriate for a specific age or age rangeprior to assigning a rating to the video that declares it appropriatefor the specific age or age range. In an aspect, if the threshold is notmet, general rating component 110 can provide the video to anotherreview system (e.g., a manual review system) to determine an appropriateage or educational rating for the video. The rating component 110 canalso continuously analyze and adjust a rating assigned to a video basedon new parental feedback.

In an embodiment where reviewers provide feedback with scores ofappropriateness of a video for a reviewee in different categories, suchas violence, profanity, vulgarity, etc., general rating component 110can determine a mean or median score for the video in each categorybased on aggregate feedback. For example, the general rating componentcan rate a video with an average score of X in violence, an averagescore of Y in profanity, and an average score of Z in vulgarity withrespect to a child of a particular age. According to this embodiment,general rating component 110 determine an age rating for a video thatindicates its appropriates for a user of a particular age with respectto violence, profanity and vulgarity.

Referring now to FIG. 3, presented is diagram of another example system300 for rating content based on parental feedback, in accordance withvarious aspects and embodiments described herein. System 300 includessame or similar features and functionalities as system 100 with theaddition of personalized rating component 302 to parental controlplatform 104. Repetitive description of like elements employed inrespective embodiments of systems described herein is omitted for sakeof brevity.

Personalized rating component 302 is configured to determine or infer apersonalized rating for a media item that reflect a degree ofappropriateness of the media for a particular user (e.g., a potentialviewer of the video or a hypothetical user having a hypotheticalprofile) based on personal characteristics associated with theparticular user in addition to the age and/or educational level of theuser. For example, a video that one parent considers appropriate for aparticular 8 year old child may be considered inappropriate by anotherparent for another 8 year old child based on a variety of personalcharacteristics associated with the different children (e.g., age,educational level, gender, religion, etc.) and a variety of personalcharacteristics associated with the different parents (e.g. the parent'svalues, age, religion, etc.). Accordingly, in one or more embodiments,personalized rating component 302 is configured to determine apersonalized appropriateness rating for a video and a potential viewerof the video based on the appropriateness feedback provided for thevideo from a plurality of parents/reviewers, a profile of the potentialviewer, profiles of other users for which feedback regardingappropriateness of the video for the respective other users has beenreceived, and/or profiles of the respective reviewers who provided thefeedback regarding appropriateness of the video for the respective otherusers.

In an embodiment, personalized rating component 302 can identify the setof parents/reviewers whom provided appropriateness feedback for a videoand the set of children/reviewees for which the appropriateness feedbackwas based. Personalized rating component 302 can further compare profileinformation for the respective children/reviewees in the set to profileinformation for the potential viewer to identify a subset of thechildren/reviewees that have profile information similar to the profileinformation for the potential viewer. For example, the profileinformation for a child/reviewee can include information identifying thechild's age and/or educational level as well as additionalcharacteristics associated with the child/reviewee. These additionalcharacteristics can include but are not limited to: user gender, userethnicity, user culture, user religion, user socioeconomic status, userlanguage, or user geographic location.

Accordingly, personalized rating component 302 can identify a subset ofthe reviewees (for which feedback associated with the video has beenreceived) that are similar to the potential viewer with respect to oneor more of age, educational level, gender, ethnicity, culture, religion,socioeconomic status, language, or geographic location. It should beappreciated that personalized rating component 302 can employ variousalgorithms that relate two sets of profile characteristics (e.g., oneset of a reviewee and another for the potential viewer) with one anotherto determine a degree of similarity between the sets of profilecharacteristics. The children/reviewees with profiles exhibiting athreshold degree of similarity to that of the potential viewer can beincluded in the subset.

In an aspect, after personalized rating component 302 has identified thesubset of children/reviewees that share similar profile information withthe potential viewer, the personalized rating component 302 can analyzethe appropriateness feedback respectively provided for thechildren/reviewees included in the subset. In particular, thepersonalized rating component 302 can analyze appropriateness feedbackfor a video provided for children similar to the potential child viewerto determine a rating for indicative of appropriateness of the video forthe potential child viewer.

In another embodiment, personalized rating component 302 can compareprofile information for a supervisor (e.g., a parent) of a potentialviewer with profile information for the respective reviewers thatprovided appropriateness feedback for the video. For example, profileinformation associated with a parent/reviewer can include the parent'sage, gender, relationship status, geographic location, language,occupation, educational level, socio economic status, ethnicity,culture, religion, political values, child rearing values, number andage of children, and/or other types of characteristics preferencesregarding types of content the parent considers appropriate and/orinappropriate for the child. According to this embodiment, personalizedrating component 302 can identify a subset of the reviewers/parents thathave similar profile information (e.g., values, religion, ethnicity,geographic location, etc.) as the parent/supervisor of the potentialviewer of the video. The personalized rating component 302 can thenanalyze feedback provided by only those reviewers/parents included inthe subset when determining or inferring an appropriateness rating forthe video and the potential viewer. As a result, the personalized ratingfor the video and the potential viewer will reflect opinions of otherparents that have similar values and other characteristics as theparent/supervisor of the potential viewer.

Still in yet another embodiment, personalized rating component 302 canselect of subset of feedback received for the video based on comparisonof profile information for the potential viewer and profile informationfor the respective reviewees for which the feedback was based, and basedon comparison of profile information for the parent/supervisor of thepotential reviewer and the profile information for the respectivereviewers. For example, the personalized rating component 302 cananalyze feedback provided by a plurality of parents regardingappropriateness of the video for their respective children and identifya first subset the children that have profile information similar to theprofile information for the potential viewer. The personalized ratingcomponent 302 can then identify the parents of the children included infirst subset and identify a second subset of parents of childrenincluded in the first subset that have profile information similar tothat of the profile of the parent of the potential viewer. Thepersonalized rating component 302 can then employ the feedbackassociated with the second subset of parents/children to facilitatedetermining a personalized rating for the video that reflects itsappropriateness for the potential viewer.

After the personalized rating component 302 has identified a subset offeedback for a video based relatedness of the respective reviewees andthe potential viewer and/or relatedness of the respective reviewers andthe supervisor/parent of the potential viewer, the personalized ratingcomponent 302 can determine a personalized rating score for the videoand the potential viewer. The personalized rating will reflect a degreeof appropriateness of the video for the potential viewer based on thepotential viewer's profile and opinions of other users/parents that havereviewed the video for other users similar to the potential viewerand/or the opinions of other users/parents that are similar to theparent/supervisor of the potential viewer.

The form of the personalized rating can vary depending on the form ofthe feedback received for the video. For example, as discussed supra,the feedback can include an indication of either “yes” this video isappropriate for my child or “no” this video is not appropriate for mychild. According to this aspect, the personalized appropriateness ratingcan include a simple “yes appropriate” or “no inappropriate” based onthe majority response. In another example, the appropriateness ratingcan indicate that X % of the sampled of reviewers indicate the video isappropriate for the potential viewer and Y % of the sampled reviewersindicate the video is inappropriate for the potential reviewers. Inanother aspect, the feedback can include an appropriateness scoreprovided by the respective reviewers (e.g., on a scale of 1 to 10 oranother suitable scale). According to this aspect, the personalizedrating component 302 can determine a personal rating for the video thatis based on an average score of the sampled reviews. Still in yetanother aspect, reviewers can provide separate scores regardingappropriateness of a video with respect to violence, profanity,vulgarity, etc. According to this aspect, the personalized ratingcomponent 302 can determine a personalized rating for the video thatincludes an averaged violence score, an averaged profanity score, anaveraged vulgarity score, etc. for the sampled feedback.

Profile information for a user, including a reviewer (e.g., a parent), areviewee (e.g., a child), a potential viewer and a supervisor for thepotential viewer can be obtained in various ways. In an aspect, therespective users can provide the information to parental controlplatform 104. For example, in association with establishment of anaccount or profile with parental control platform 104 by a parentaluser, the parent can provide profile information regarding his or herage, gender, ethnicity, religion, language, culture, location,educational level, political values, family values, child rearingtechniques, etc. The parent can also provide information regarding hisor her child's profile information, such as the child's age, gender,ethnicity, religion, language, culture, location, educational level,etc. In another aspect, the child can provide the profile information inassociation with establishment of an account with media provider. Inanother aspect, profile information for a user can be imported fromother sources affiliated with parental control platform 104 and/or mediaprovider in accordance with permission provided by the user. (e.g., asocial networking website at which the user has an account).

Still in yet another aspect, parental control platform 104 can inferprofile information to associate with a user based on review of watchhistory of the user. For example, parental control platform can infer anage, gender, language, geographic region, etc., of a user based on thetype of content watched by the user, the location at which the contentis watched, the time of day and duration for which the content iswatched, and the social affiliations/activity of the user.

In an embodiment, profile information can also include user declared orinferred tolerances to certain characteristics of content. Inparticular, in association with usage of a review system that allowsusers to rate videos for appropriateness in different categories, suchas violence, profanity, vulgarity, etc., a user can provide informationthat identifies a tolerance level for his or her child with respect toscores for violence, profanity, vulgarity, etc. For example, a parentcan associate information with his or her child profile or his or herchild's profile that indicates the videos with a violence score of X orlower are appropriate for the child, videos with a profanity score of Yor lower are appropriate for the child, videos with a vulgarity score ofZ or lower are appropriate for the child, etc. Similarly, in associationwith usage of a review system that employs score values or number (e.g.,on a scale of 1-10 or another suitable scale), the parent can declare inprofile information for his or her child, an acceptable score for whichvideos are considered appropriate for his or her child. For example, theuser can provide information stating that videos having overallappropriateness scores of N or higher are appropriate for the child.

In an aspect of this embodiment, personalized rating component 302 canalter a rating determined based on the sampled feedback for a video withrespect to categories of violence, profanity and vulgarity based onprofile information for the potential viewer regarding tolerances toviolence, profanity etc. For example, a review for a child having asimilar profile as the potential viewer with respect to age, gender,educational level, ethnicity, religion, etc. can have individual scoresfor a video (e.g., on a scale of 1 to 10) with respect to violence,profanity, and vulgarity. According to this example, the individualscores for the video may be a 7 for violence, a 2 for profanity and a 1for vulgarity (wherein a higher score reflects a higher degree ofinappropriateness), giving the video a total appropriateness score of 10out of 30 (wherein the lower the score the more appropriate the video).However, profile information for the potential viewer can indicate thepotential viewer has a high tolerance to violence (e.g., the potentialviewer can tolerate violence scores of 8 or less). Accordingly,personalized rating component 302 can be configured to filter the ratingbased on the potential viewer's profile information and reduce the scorefrom a 10 to a lower number (e.g., a 3 based on removal of the violencescore component).

FIG. 4 depicts an exemplary user interface 400 provided by interfacecomponent 122 that facilitates receiving review, by a parent, of mediaitems that have been accessed or may be accessed by a child of theparent. Repetitive description of like elements employed in otherembodiments described herein is omitted for sake of brevity.

Interface 400 includes same or similar aspects as interface 200.Interface 400 particularly exemplifies an example interface that allowsa user to control various settings regarding tolerances to contentratings. With interface 400, the user (e.g., Erin), has selected thesettings options 402 from the menu bar. In response to selection of thesettings option 402, a plurality of controls 406-416 are presented inarea 404 that relate to settings, for the parent's profile (Erin) andthe parent's child profile (Alexander), of tolerances for contentratings that are preferred for the parent and the child. In an aspect,the initial settings of the various controls 406-416 can be set to adefault setting. This default setting can be standard for all users orcan account in part for characteristics of the user (e.g., the user'sage, demographics, location, etc.).

However, using the various controls 406-416, the Erin can manuallyselect a desired setting. For example, control 406 allows the user(Erin) to select rating thresholds, with respect to violence, profanity,and vulgarity, that the user Erin would like for content that isrecommended to the her. Control 408 allows Erin to select ratingthresholds, with respect to violence, profanity, and vulgarity, thatErin would like for content that is recommended to the user's childAlexander. Control 410 allows Erin to select rating thresholds, withrespect to a total rating score, that the user Erin would like forcontent that is recommended to the user's childe Alexander. Control 412allows Erin to select rating thresholds, with respect to violence,profanity, and vulgarity, that Erin would like for content that isrecommended to the user's child Alexander during the specific context ofdaytime. Control 414 allows Erin to select rating thresholds, withrespect to violence, profanity, and vulgarity, that Erin would like forcontent that is recommended to the user's child Alexander during thespecific context of being located at home. Control 416 allows Erin toselect rating thresholds, with respect to violence, profanity, andvulgarity, that Erin would like for content that is recommended to theuser's child Alexander during the specific context of being located awayfrom home.

With reference back to FIG. 3, with personalized rating component 302,feedback provided by a reviewer/parent will inherently reflectattributes of the parent included in the parents profile (e.g., age,gender, ethnicity, religion, language, culture, location, educationallevel, political values, family values, child rearing techniques, etc.)as well as attributes of the child for which the parent is reviewing thevideo (e.g., age, gender, ethnicity, religion, language, culture,location, educational level, etc.). Therefore, by determining a personalappropriateness rating of a video for a potential viewer based onfeedback regarding appropriateness of a video for a children similar tothe potential viewer and feedback from parent similar to a parent of thepotential viewer, the personal appropriateness rating will reflect adegree of appropriateness of the video for the potential viewer based onvarious characteristics of the potential viewers profile and variouscharacteristics of a profile of the potential reviewersparent/supervisor.

Referring now to FIG. 5, presented is diagram of another example system400 for rating content based on parental feedback, in accordance withvarious aspects and embodiments described herein. System 500 includessame or similar features and functionalities as system 100 with theaddition of recommendation component 502 to parental control platform104. Repetitive description of like elements employed in respectiveembodiments of systems described herein is omitted for sake of brevity.

In one or more embodiments, recommendation component 502 is configuredto recommend media items to users based on a general age or educationalrating associated with the media item and an age or educational level ofthe user. In particular, as discussed supra, general rating component110 can associate a rating with a media item that reflects an age/agerange and/or an educational level/range that the media item isconsidered appropriate for. In turn, recommendation component 502 canrecommend the media item to other users that are the age or within theage range, or have the educational level, associated with the rating.For example, where general rating component 110 associates a rating witha video that indicates it is suitable for children between the ages of 3and 5, recommendation component 502 can recommend the video to users (orparents/supervisors of those users) that are between the ages of 3 and5.

In one or more other embodiments, recommendation component 502 isconfigured to identify and recommend media items to a user based on apersonalized rating for the user and the media item pair. For example,recommendation component 502 can direct personalized rating component302 to generate personalized ratings for media items based on therespective media items and the profile of a potential viewer using thetechniques discussed supra with respect to personalized rating component302. For example, personalized rating component can analyze a set ofvideos to determine personalized ratings for the videos in the set thatreflect a degree of appropriateness of the respective videos for thepotential viewer.

In an aspect, recommendation component 502 can initially select the setof videos for which to determine personalized ratings for based on ageneral rating associated with the videos and an age of the potentialviewer. According to this aspect, recommendation component 502 can applya broad filter against videos provided by media provider to eliminateanalysis of those videos for which there is a low confidence level ofbeing considered appropriate for the potential viewer. For example, whenthe potential viewer is 10 years old, recommendation component 502 canbe configured to select a set of video from a large database of videosthat are associated with a general age rating of 10 or within apredefined range with a median of 10 (e.g., between ages 7 and 13).According to this aspect, rather than generating personalized ratingsfor a particular user and all potential media items provided by mediaprovider 102, personalized rating component 302 can generatepersonalized rating for a smaller set of videos. It should be appreciatethat recommendation component 502 can employ various otherfilters/minimum thresholds using features associated with a video and acharacteristic of a potential viewer to select a set of videos providedby media provider 102 for which to generate personalized ratings. Forexample, recommendation component 502 can be configured to select videosto include in the set based on a language of the potential viewer, ageographic location of the potential viewer, an educational level of thepotential viewer

Recommendation component 502 can be configured to recommend the videosin the set that are associated with a personalized rating that satisfiesa recommendation requirement or rating threshold. For example, when thepersonalized rating is a value, such as either “yes appropriate” or “noinappropriate,” recommendation component 502 can be configured torecommend only those videos to the potential viewer that are rated asappropriate. In another example, when the personalized rating is a valuesuch as an appropriateness score (e.g., a score of 5 out of 30, a scoreof 75% deem the video appropriate, etc.), recommendation component 502can be configured to recommend the videos having an appropriatenessscore above a threshold score. In some aspects, the threshold score canbe determined by parental control platform 104. In another aspects, thethreshold score can be defined by the parent/supervisor of the potentialviewer.

In various additional embodiments, recommendation component 502 canenhance the granularity of recommendations based on correlations betweenmultiple user characteristics and media personalized media ratings. Forexample, recommendation component 502 can determine or infer a characterprofile (based on a plurality of demographic and/or preferencecharacteristics of the user and/or the user's parent) that correlates(with respect to appropriateness for viewing) with different media itemsbased on personalized ratings determined for the respective media itemsand different users. Recommendation component 502 can then recommend therespective media items to another user based on degree of similaritybetween the other user and the character profile.

For example, in association with determining personalized ratings for avideo and user pair, recommendation component 502 can associate thevideo with a user profile type. For example, recommendation component502 can determine that a video is suitable for user Tommy who has aprofile with characteristics A, B, and C. Accordingly, recommendationcomponent 502 can associate information with the video that denotes it asuitable for other users having a profile similar to Tommy or having aprofile with characteristics A, B and C. Over time, as the same video isanalyzed to determine a personalized rating between the video anddifferent user pairs, the characteristics of a generic user profile typethat the video is appropriate for will be become better defined (e.g.,using various machine learning models). According to this embodiment,rather than analyzing a video/potential viewer pair to determine apersonalized rating for the video/potential viewer pair, recommendationcomponent 502 can examine a profile of the potential viewer and identifythose videos which have been previously determined appropriate for otherusers with a similar profile.

According to an embodiment, based on parental feedback of a media itemfrom a first user (e.g., a parent) regarding appropriateness of themedia item for a second user (e.g., the parent's child), personalizedrating component 302 can associate a rating with the media item thatreflects appropriateness of the video for the second user, including oneor more characteristics of the second user, such as the second user'sage, gender, educational level, etc. Recommendation component 502 canthen recommend the media item to a third user (e.g., another child) thatshares similar characteristics as the second user. Recommendationcomponent 502 can further identify other media items that wereconsidered (based on a personalized rating), appropriate for a userhaving the characteristics (e.g., age, gender, educational level, etc.)of the second user and/or third user. Recommendation component 502 canalso recommend these other media items to the second and third users.

In another embodiment, recommendation component 502 can analyze feedbackreceived for a video from a plurality of different parents regardingappropriateness of the video for a plurality of different children.Recommendation component 502 can further generate groups or clusters ofthe feedback that are associated with children having similar profilecharacteristics and/or parents having similar profile characteristics.Recommendation component 502 can also identify clusters of the feedbackthat overlap (e.g., both the parents have similar characteristics to oneanother and their respective children have similar characteristics toone another). Recommendation component 502 can further directpersonalized rating component 302 to determine a personalized rating forthe video with respect to the different clusters based on the feedbackrespectively associated with the different clusters. In turn,recommendation component 502 can associate a video with differentappropriateness rating for the different cluster and more specificallywith characteristics of the profiles of the users (e.g., child profilesand/or parent profiles) associated with the different clusters. Whenrecommending the video to a new user, the recommendation component 502can determine a cluster that the new user is most similar to based onthe new user's profile and the profiles of the users included in theclusters. The recommendation component 502 can then user the rating forthe video associated with the cluster to determine whether to recommendthe video to the new user or not.

FIG. 5 presents a diagram of another example system 500 for ratingcontent based on parental feedback, in accordance with various aspectsand embodiments described herein. System 600 includes same or similarfeatures and functionalities as system 500 with the addition of contextcomponent 602 to parental control platform 104. Repetitive descriptionof like elements employed in respective embodiments of systems describedherein is omitted for sake of brevity.

In addition to age, educational level and other features associated withwhy a media item may considered appropriate or inappropriate for aparticular user by a supervisor of the user (e.g., the user's parent),the context of the user can when watching the video can also play arole. For example, the appropriateness of a video can vary depending onthe time of day, day of week, type of device the user is on, a locationof the user, other users around the user (e.g., also watching thevideo), and movement of the user. For instance, a parent may restricther child to watching more educational videos during the day and moreleisurely videos at night or on weekends. Accordingly, depending on thetime of day/day of week, the appropriateness rating requirement withrespect to educational value of a recommended video can vary. In anotherinstance, a parent may be more strict on the level of appropriateness ofa video watched by her child when not at home while being lest strict onthe level of appropriateness of videos watched by her child when at home(e.g., which can be determined by location, mobility, device at whichthe video is watch etc.). In yet another example, videos that arerecommended to certain children on certain days of the week (e.g.,religious days) can be associated with a higher appropriateness ratingwith respect to religion than videos that are recommended to thechildren on other days of the week. In another example, anappropriateness threshold for a user can vary depending on the otherusers around the users who are also going to be watching the recommendedvideo. For example, a video that is appropriate for watching by a firstuser alone may not be appropriate for watching by the first user whenaccompanied by one or more other users of varying age, educationallevel, and/or other profile characteristics (e.g., gender, religion,culture, etc.).

Context component 602 is configured to determine one or more contextualfactors associated with a user at a time when a video is to berecommended to the user for watching. For example, prior to recommendinga video to a user for watching by recommendation component 502 based ona general rating or personalized rating associated therewith, contextcomponent can determine one or more of: time of day, day of week, typeof device the user is on, a location of the user, other users around theuser (e.g., also watching the video), and movement of the user. Contextcomponent 602 can further analyze various restrictions provided bysupervisors/parents of children (e.g., via their profile information)and/or by parental control platform 104 regarding appropriateness ratingthreshold variances under difference contexts and apply the thresholdsapplicable to the current contexts to determine whether a video can berecommended (e.g., via recommendation component 502).

FIG. 7 presents a diagram of another example system 700 for ratingcontent based on parental feedback, in accordance with various aspectsand embodiments described herein. System 700 includes same or similarfeatures and functionalities as system 600 with the additions ofcalibration component 702 and metadata component 704 to parental controlplatform 104. Repetitive description of like elements employed inrespective embodiments of systems described herein is omitted for sakeof brevity.

Calibration component 702 is configured to facilitate determining a morepersonalized rating/recommendation of a media item based on reputationsand/or trust levels associated with respective reviewers providingparental feedback for which the a is based (e.g., a general age oreducational level rating and/or a personalized rating). For example, thefeedback of some reviewers (or parents) regarding appropriateness of amedia item for another user (e.g., based on the other user's age,gender, religion, culture, educational level, etc.) may be consideredmore credible and valuable than that of others. For instance, feedbackregarding appropriateness of a video for users of a particular age rangeand educational level received from a grade school teacher may be moretargeted than feedback received from an elder parent where the video isan educational video related to geography. Accordingly, the feedbackfrom the grade school teach should receive greater weight than thefeedback from the elder parent when determining or inferring a rating toassociate with the video.

Calibration component 702 can analyze information associated with a userproviding feedback related to the user's trustworthiness and/orknowledge with respect to the subject matter of a media item beingreviewed. Based on the analysis, calibration component 702 can weigh ordiscount the user's feedback regarding appropriateness of the media itemfor a particular user accordingly. The weight or discount applied to thefeedback will influence or a rating applied to the media item based onthe feedback by general rating component 110. In some aspects,calibration component 702 can be configured to completely disregardfeedback provided by untrustworthy/credible reviewers.

In an aspect, reviewers can become associated with trust scores thatrepresent a level of trust a community of users have in the respectivereviewers regarding their opinions of appropriateness of media items forother users. For example, a parent that regularly provides good andaccurate feedback regarding appropriateness of media items for her childmay become associated with a high trust score among users that havechildren with similar profiles to that of her child. In another example,a parent that regularly regards videos appropriate for children of acertain age that a majority of parents would not consider appropriatefor children of the certain age can be associated with a low trustscore. According to this aspect, calibration component 702 can filterratings associated with media items based on trust informationassociated with the reviewers from which feedback for which the ratingsare based, is received.

In various embodiments, calibration component 702 is configured toidentify and score potential reviewers (e.g., parents) who are regardedas more trustworthy than others. In an aspect, calibration component 702and/or review component 108 can allow users to rate or score one anotherwith respect to a degree to which the respective users consider oneanother trustworthy or credible regarding their evaluations ofappropriateness of media items. For example, a first parent can reviewfeedback provided by another parent or a rating associated with a videobased on the other parent's feedback. The first parent can furtherprovide information (e.g., a score) that reflects a degree to which thefirst parent agrees with the opinions of the second parent. Thisinformation can be employed by general rating component 110,personalized rating component 302, and calibration component 702 whenrating the video and when rating other media items based on the secondparents feedback.

In another aspect, parental control platform 104 can allow a user toindicate other users' from which to base ratings and/or recommendationsof media items that will be presented to the user (or user associatedwith the user). This indication can be defined or provided in theparent's profile and/or inferred by parental control platform 104. Theindication of another user to trust can include identification of aspecific user (e.g., John Smith), or identification of a characteristicof associated with user (e.g., users that belong to the same socialcircle as the parent/child, users belonging to the Catholic faith, usersthat have a college education, users whose children attend school EliteHigh, etc.). For example, a parent can indicate other users from whichto base ratings and/or recommendations of media items that will bepresented to the parent or the parent's child. According to this aspect,feedback received by users that are not indicated by the parent can bedisregarded by general rating component 110, and personalized ratingcomponent 302, and recommendation component 502 when rating and/orrecommending media items to the parent or parent's child.

In one or more embodiments, a group of parents can establish a circle oftrust wherein the respective parents in the group provide information toparental control platform 104 that identifies a trust relationshipbetween the parents. The trust relationship can control what parent'sfeedback are considered by general rating component 110, thepersonalized rating component 302 and/or recommendation component 502when rating and/or recommending media items to the children of parentsin the circle. For example, a group of parents can establish a trustcircle among one other based on the fact that their children attend thesame school. According to this example, a parent can provide informationto parental control platform for association with his or her profilethat indicates only feedback from parents whose children attend schoolElite High should be considered by parental control platform 104 whenrating and recommending media content to the parent or the parent'schild.

Parental control platform 104 can also receive and apply additionalinstructions from a parent regarding what media items can be viewed byand/or recommended to the parent's child in association with feedbackreceived by parental control platform 104. For example, a parent canauthorize that her child can be recommended and/or access media itemsthat receive a rating (e.g., by general rating component 110) above acertain threshold. In another example, a parent can authorize that herchild can be recommended and/or access media items that receive a ratingabove a certain threshold from a particular user (e.g., John Smith) oruser associated with a particular characteristic (e.g., a userassociated with a trust score above a threshold, a user belonging to theCatholic faith, a user that has a college education, a user whose childattends school Elite High, etc.).

Metadata component 704 is configured to associate metadata with a mediaitem based on feedback received for the media item and/or a rating(e.g., general or personalized) for the media item. For example,metadata component 704 can associate individual scores applied to amedia item by respective reviewers regarding appropriateness of themedia item for another user. Metadata component 604 can also associateratings with a media item determined by general rating component 110. Inanother example, metadata component 704 can associate metadata with amedia item that reflects characteristics of a user profile (e.g., age,gender, religion, culture, family values, etc.) that the media item hasbeen found (e.g., base on a plurality of personalized ratings) to beappropriate for. Metadata component 704 can also associate metadata witha media item that describes any other aspects of the media item receivedin association with parental feedback. For example, such information caninclude that describes content type, what occurs in a video or song,actors that appear in a video, a description of violence in a video, adescription of vulgar language in a song, etc.

FIG. 8 presents a diagram of another example system 800 for ratingcontent based on parental feedback, in accordance with various aspectsand embodiments described herein. System 800 includes same or similarfeatures and functionalities as system 700 with the addition ofinference component 802 to parental control platform 104. Repetitivedescription of like elements employed in respective embodiments ofsystems described herein is omitted for sake of brevity.

Inference component 802 is configured to provide for or aid in variousinferences or determinations associated with aspects of parental controlplatform 104. For example, inference component 802 can facilitategeneral rating component 110 with inferring a general age or educationalrating to associate with a media item based on collective parentalfeedback for the media item. In another example, inference component 802can facilitate personalized rating component 302 in association withdetermining a personalized rating for a media item for a specific userbased on a profile of the specific user, profiles of reviewers andreviewees of the media item. In another example, inference component 802can facilitate recommendation component 502 with inferring users torecommend a media item to base on a rating associated with the mediaitem, parental feedback regarding the media item, and/or characteristicof the users to which the media item will be recommended. In anotheraspect, inference component 802 can facilitate context component 602 inassociation with determining a context of a potential viewer of a mediaitem and rating for the video that reflects the context. In yet anotherexample, inference component 802 can facilitate calibration component702 with calibrating a rating for a media item based on reputationsand/or trust levels associated with respective reviewers providingparental feedback for which the rating is based.

In aspect, all or portions of media provider 102 can be operativelycoupled to inference component 802. Moreover, inference component 802can be granted access to all or portions of remote content sources,external information sources and client devices (e.g., client device118). In order to provide for or aid in the numerous inferencesdescribed herein, inference component 802 can examine the entirety or asubset of the data to which it is granted access and can provide forreasoning about or infer states of the system, environment, etc. from aset of observations as captured via events and/or data. An inference canbe employed to identify a specific context or action, or can generate aprobability distribution over states, for example. The inference can beprobabilistic—that is, the computation of a probability distributionover states of interest based on a consideration of data and events. Aninference can also refer to techniques employed for composinghigher-level events from a set of events and/or data.

Such an inference can result in the construction of new events oractions from a set of observed events and/or stored event data, whetheror not the events are correlated in close temporal proximity, andwhether the events and data come from one or several event and datasources. Various classification (explicitly and/or implicitly trained)schemes and/or systems (e.g., support vector machines, neural networks,expert systems, Bayesian belief networks, fuzzy logic, data fusionengines, etc.) can be employed in connection with performing automaticand/or inferred action in connection with the claimed subject matter.

A classifier can map an input attribute vector, x=(x1, x2, x3, x4, xn),to a confidence that the input belongs to a class, such as byf(x)=confidence(class). Such classification can employ a probabilisticand/or statistical-based analysis (e.g., factoring into the analysisutilities and costs) to prognose or infer an action that a user desiresto be automatically performed. A support vector machine (SVM) is anexample of a classifier that can be employed. The SVM operates byfinding a hyper-surface in the space of possible inputs, where thehyper-surface attempts to split the triggering criteria from thenon-triggering events. Intuitively, this makes the classificationcorrect for testing data that is near, but not identical to trainingdata. Other directed and undirected model classification approachesinclude, e.g., naïve Bayes, Bayesian networks, decision trees, neuralnetworks, fuzzy logic models, and probabilistic classification modelsproviding different patterns of independence can be employed.Classification as used herein also is inclusive of statisticalregression that is utilized to develop models of priority.

In view of the example systems and/or devices described herein, examplemethods that can be implemented in accordance with the disclosed subjectmatter can be further appreciated with reference to flowcharts in FIGS.9-11. For purposes of simplicity of explanation, example methodsdisclosed herein are presented and described as a series of acts;however, it is to be understood and appreciated that the disclosedsubject matter is not limited by the order of acts, as some acts mayoccur in different orders and/or concurrently with other acts from thatshown and described herein. For example, a method disclosed herein couldalternatively be represented as a series of interrelated states orevents, such as in a state diagram. Moreover, interaction diagram(s) mayrepresent methods in accordance with the disclosed subject matter whendisparate entities enact disparate portions of the methods. Furthermore,not all illustrated acts may be required to implement a method inaccordance with the subject specification. It should be furtherappreciated that the methods disclosed throughout the subjectspecification are capable of being stored on an article of manufactureto facilitate transporting and transferring such methods to computersfor execution by a processor or for storage in a memory.

FIG. 9 illustrates a flow chart of an example method 900 for ratingmedia based on parental feedback, in accordance with various aspects andembodiments described herein. At 902, a user interface is provided to afirst user that allows a first user to provide feedback regardingendorsement, by the first user, of videos watched by a second user(e.g., via interface component 122). At 904, providing the first useraccess, via the user interface, to a watch history of the second user,wherein the watch history includes one or more videos watched by thesecond user (e.g., via access component 106). At 906, in response toinput at the user interface, feedback is received from the first userregarding endorsement, by the first user, of a video included in thewatch history of the second user (e.g., via review component 108). Forexample, a parent can review a video watched by her child and rate thevideo for appropriateness for her child in view of an amount ofviolence, profanity, or vulgarity associated with the video. In anotherexample, a parent can review an educational video watched by her childand rate the video for appropriateness of her child with respect to adifficulty level of the content of the video.

At 908, an age rating for the video is determined based on an age of thesecond user and the feedback. (e.g., via general rating component 110).For example, based on the first user's feedback and feedback regardingappropriateness of the video for their respective children received fromother users, a rating can be associated with the video that reflects thecollective opinions of the users providing feedback. For example, therating can indicate the video is appropriate for children of a specificage (e.g., 5) or age range (e.g., 3-5), as opposed to a general ratingof G, PG, PG-13, R, etc.).

FIG. 10 illustrates a flow chart of another example method 1000 forrating content based on parental feedback, in accordance with variousaspects and embodiments described herein. At 1002, supervisory usersrespectively having a supervisory role over other users are providedwith access to watch histories of respective ones of the other users;(e.g., via access component 106). For example, parents can be providedaccess to watch histories and other media interaction activity (e.g.,videos saved for watching, video recommended for watching, etc.) of thechildren at a media provider (e.g., media provider 102). At 1004,feedback is received from the supervisory users regardingappropriateness of a media item for the other users, respectively (e.g.,via review component 108). For example, parents of different childrencan provide feedback regarding their opinions of appropriateness of asame for their children that was respectively watched by their children.The children can vary in age, educational level, and a variety ofdifferent characteristics (e.g., gender, culture, language, ethnicity,religion, etc.). At 1006, an age rating is determined for the media itembased on an average age of the other users that the feedback indicatesthe video is appropriate for (e.g., via general rating component 110).At 1008, the media item is recommended to a user for watching based onthe user having an age that satisfies the age rating (e.g., viarecommendation component 502).

FIG. 11 illustrates a flow chart of another example method 1100 forrating content based on parental feedback, in accordance with variousaspects and embodiments described herein. At 1102, supervisory usersrespectively having a supervisory role over other users are providedwith access to watch histories of respective ones of the other users;(e.g., via access component 106). For example, parents can be providedaccess to watch histories and other media interaction activity (e.g.,videos saved for watching, video recommended for watching, etc.) of thechildren at a media provider (e.g., media provider 102). At 1104,feedback is received from the supervisory users regardingappropriateness of a video for the other users, respectively (e.g., viareview component 108). For example, parents of different children canprovide feedback regarding their opinions of appropriateness of a samefor their children that was respectively watched by their children. Thechildren can vary in age, educational level, and a variety of differentcharacteristics (e.g., gender, culture, language, ethnicity, religion,etc.).

At 1106, a potential viewer for the video is identified (e.g., viarecommendation component 502). For example, a video to whom the videomight be recommended or hypothetical view having a certain profile canbe identified. At 1108, a subset of the other users having profilecharacteristics that are similar to profile characteristics of thepotential viewer are identified (e.g., via recommendation component502). For example, other children having profile characteristics (e.g.,age, education level, gender, religion, culture, etc.) similar toprofile characteristics of the potential viewer can be identified. At1110, a subset of the feedback associate with the subset of the otherusers is analyzed, and at 1112, a personalized rating is determined forthe video that reflects a degree of appropriateness of the video for thepotential viewer (e.g., via personalized rating component 302). At 1114,the video is then recommended to the potential viewer for watching basedon the personalized rating satisfying a recommendation requirement(e.g., via recommendation component 502). For example, therecommendation requirement can include a particular rating value or aminimum rating score.

Example Operating Environments

The systems and processes described below can be embodied withinhardware, such as a single integrated circuit (IC) chip, multiple ICs,an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), or the like. Further,the order in which some or all of the process blocks appear in eachprocess should not be deemed limiting. Rather, it should be understoodthat some of the process blocks can be executed in a variety of orders,not all of which may be explicitly illustrated in this disclosure.

With reference to FIG. 12, a suitable environment 1200 for implementingvarious aspects of the claimed subject matter includes a computer 1202.The computer 1202 includes a processing unit 1204, a system memory 1206,a codec 1205, and a system bus 1208. The system bus 1208 couples systemcomponents including, but not limited to, the system memory 1206 to theprocessing unit 1204. The processing unit 1204 can be any of variousavailable processors. Dual microprocessors and other multiprocessorarchitectures also can be employed as the processing unit 1204.

The system bus 1208 can be any of several types of bus structure(s)including the memory bus or memory controller, a peripheral bus orexternal bus, and/or a local bus using any variety of available busarchitectures including, but not limited to, Industrial StandardArchitecture (ISA), Micro-Channel Architecture (MSA), Extended ISA(EISA), Intelligent Drive Electronics (IDE), VESA Local Bus (VLB),Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI), Card Bus, Universal Serial Bus(USB), Advanced Graphics Port (AGP), Personal Computer Memory CardInternational Association bus (PCMCIA), Firewire (IEEE 13124), and SmallComputer Systems Interface (SCSI).

The system memory 1206 includes volatile memory 1210 and non-volatilememory 1212. The basic input/output system (BIOS), containing the basicroutines to transfer information between elements within the computer1202, such as during start-up, is stored in non-volatile memory 1212. Inaddition, according to present innovations, codec 1205 may include atleast one of an encoder or decoder, wherein the at least one of anencoder or decoder may consist of hardware, a combination of hardwareand software, or software. Although, codec 1205 is depicted as aseparate component, codec 1205 may be contained within non-volatilememory 1212. By way of illustration, and not limitation, non-volatilememory 1212 can include read only memory (ROM), programmable ROM (PROM),electrically programmable ROM (EPROM), electrically erasableprogrammable ROM (EEPROM), or flash memory. Volatile memory 1210includes random access memory (RAM), which acts as external cachememory. According to present aspects, the volatile memory may store thewrite operation retry logic (not shown in FIG. 12) and the like. By wayof illustration and not limitation, RAM is available in many forms suchas static RAM (SRAM), dynamic RAM (DRAM), synchronous DRAM (SDRAM),double data rate SDRAM (DDR SDRAM), and enhanced SDRAM (ESDRAM.

Computer 1202 may also include removable/non-removable,volatile/non-volatile computer storage medium. FIG. 12 illustrates, forexample, disk storage 1214. Disk storage 1214 includes, but is notlimited to, devices like a magnetic disk drive, solid state disk (SSD)floppy disk drive, tape drive, Jaz drive, Zip drive, LS-70 drive, flashmemory card, or memory stick. In addition, disk storage 1214 can includestorage medium separately or in combination with other storage mediumincluding, but not limited to, an optical disk drive such as a compactdisk ROM device (CD-ROM), CD recordable drive (CD-R Drive), CDrewritable drive (CD-RW Drive) or a digital versatile disk ROM drive(DVD-ROM). To facilitate connection of the disk storage devices 1214 tothe system bus 1208, a removable or non-removable interface is typicallyused, such as interface 1216.

It is to be appreciated that FIG. 12 describes software that acts as anintermediary between users and the basic computer resources described inthe suitable operating environment 1200. Such software includes anoperating system 1218. Operating system 1218, which can be stored ondisk storage 1214, acts to control and allocate resources of thecomputer system 1202. Applications 1220 take advantage of the managementof resources by operating system 1218 through program modules 1224, andprogram data 1226, such as the boot/shutdown transaction table and thelike, stored either in system memory 1206 or on disk storage 1214. It isto be appreciated that the claimed subject matter can be implementedwith various operating systems or combinations of operating systems.

A user enters commands or information into the computer 1202 throughinput device(s) 1228. Input devices 1228 include, but are not limitedto, a pointing device such as a mouse, trackball, stylus, touch pad,keyboard, microphone, joystick, game pad, satellite dish, scanner, TVtuner card, digital camera, digital video camera, web camera, and thelike. These and other input devices connect to the processing unit 1204through the system bus 1208 via interface port(s) 1230. Interfaceport(s) 1230 include, for example, a serial port, a parallel port, agame port, and a universal serial bus (USB). Output device(s) 1236 usesome of the same type of ports as input device(s). Thus, for example, aUSB port may be used to provide input to computer 1202, and to outputinformation from computer 1202 to an output device 1236. Output adapter1234 is provided to illustrate that there are some output devices 1236like monitors, speakers, and printers, among other output devices 1236,which require special adapters. The output adapters 1234 include, by wayof illustration and not limitation, video and sound cards that provide ameans of connection between the output device 1236 and the system bus1208. It should be noted that other devices and/or systems of devicesprovide both input and output capabilities such as remote computer(s)1238.

Computer 1202 can operate in a networked environment using logicalconnections to one or more remote computers, such as remote computer(s)1238. The remote computer(s) 1238 can be a personal computer, a server,a router, a network PC, a workstation, a microprocessor based appliance,a peer device, a smart phone, a tablet, or other network node, andtypically includes many of the elements described relative to computer1202. For purposes of brevity, only a memory storage device 1240 isillustrated with remote computer(s) 1238. Remote computer(s) 1238 islogically connected to computer 1202 through a network interface 1242and then connected via communication connection(s) 1244. Networkinterface 1242 encompasses wire and/or wireless communication networkssuch as local-area networks (LAN) and wide-area networks (WAN) andcellular networks. LAN technologies include Fiber Distributed DataInterface (FDDI), Copper Distributed Data Interface (CDDI), Ethernet,Token Ring and the like. WAN technologies include, but are not limitedto, point-to-point links, circuit switching networks like IntegratedServices Digital Networks (ISDN) and variations thereon, packetswitching networks, and Digital Subscriber Lines (DSL).

Communication connection(s) 1244 refers to the hardware/softwareemployed to connect the network interface 1242 to the bus 1208. Whilecommunication connection 1244 is shown for illustrative clarity insidecomputer 1202, it can also be external to computer 1202. Thehardware/software necessary for connection to the network interface 1242includes, for exemplary purposes only, internal and externaltechnologies such as, modems including regular telephone grade modems,cable modems and DSL modems, ISDN adapters, and wired and wirelessEthernet cards, hubs, and routers.

Referring now to FIG. 13, there is illustrated a schematic block diagramof a computing environment 1300 in accordance with this disclosure. Thesystem 1300 includes one or more client(s) 1302 (e.g., laptops, smartphones, PDAs, media players, computers, portable electronic devices,tablets, and the like). The client(s) 1302 can be hardware and/orsoftware (e.g., threads, processes, computing devices). The system 1300also includes one or more server(s) 1304. The server(s) 1304 can also behardware or hardware in combination with software (e.g., threads,processes, computing devices). The servers 1304 can house threads toperform transformations by employing aspects of this disclosure, forexample. One possible communication between a client 1302 and a server1304 can be in the form of a data packet transmitted between two or morecomputer processes wherein the data packet may include video data. Thedata packet can include a metadata, e.g., associated contextualinformation, for example. The system 1300 includes a communicationframework 1306 (e.g., a global communication network such as theInternet, or mobile network(s)) that can be employed to facilitatecommunications between the client(s) 1302 and the server(s) 1304.

Communications can be facilitated via a wired (including optical fiber)and/or wireless technology. The client(s) 1302 include or areoperatively connected to one or more client data store(s) 1308 that canbe employed to store information local to the client(s) 1302 (e.g.,associated contextual information). Similarly, the server(s) 1304 areoperatively include or are operatively connected to one or more serverdata store(s) 1310 that can be employed to store information local tothe servers 1304.

In one embodiment, a client 1302 can transfer an encoded file, inaccordance with the disclosed subject matter, to server 1304. Server1304 can store the file, decode the file, or transmit the file toanother client 1302. It is to be appreciated, that a client 1302 canalso transfer uncompressed file to a server 1304 and server 1304 cancompress the file in accordance with the disclosed subject matter.Likewise, server 1304 can encode video information and transmit theinformation via communication framework 1306 to one or more clients1302.

The illustrated aspects of the disclosure may also be practiced indistributed computing environments where certain tasks are performed byremote processing devices that are linked through a communicationsnetwork. In a distributed computing environment, program modules can belocated in both local and remote memory storage devices.

Moreover, it is to be appreciated that various components described inthis description can include electrical circuit(s) that can includecomponents and circuitry elements of suitable value in order toimplement the embodiments of the subject innovation(s). Furthermore, itcan be appreciated that many of the various components can beimplemented on one or more integrated circuit (IC) chips. For example,in one embodiment, a set of components can be implemented in a single ICchip. In other embodiments, one or more of respective components arefabricated or implemented on separate IC chips.

What has been described above includes examples of the embodiments ofthe present invention. It is, of course, not possible to describe everyconceivable combination of components or methodologies for purposes ofdescribing the claimed subject matter, but it is to be appreciated thatmany further combinations and permutations of the subject innovation arepossible. Accordingly, the claimed subject matter is intended to embraceall such alterations, modifications, and variations that fall within thespirit and scope of the appended claims. Moreover, the above descriptionof illustrated embodiments of the subject disclosure, including what isdescribed in the Abstract, is not intended to be exhaustive or to limitthe disclosed embodiments to the precise forms disclosed. While specificembodiments and examples are described in this disclosure forillustrative purposes, various modifications are possible that areconsidered within the scope of such embodiments and examples, as thoseskilled in the relevant art can recognize.

In particular and in regard to the various functions performed by theabove described components, devices, circuits, systems and the like, theterms used to describe such components are intended to correspond,unless otherwise indicated, to any component which performs thespecified function of the described component (e.g., a functionalequivalent), even though not structurally equivalent to the disclosedstructure, which performs the function in the disclosure illustratedexemplary aspects of the claimed subject matter. In this regard, it willalso be recognized that the innovation includes a system as well as acomputer-readable storage medium having computer-executable instructionsfor performing the acts and/or events of the various methods of theclaimed subject matter.

The aforementioned systems/circuits/modules have been described withrespect to interaction between several components/blocks. It can beappreciated that such systems/circuits and components/blocks can includethose components or specified sub-components, some of the specifiedcomponents or sub-components, and/or additional components, andaccording to various permutations and combinations of the foregoing.Sub-components can also be implemented as components communicativelycoupled to other components rather than included within parentcomponents (hierarchical). Additionally, it should be noted that one ormore components may be combined into a single component providingaggregate functionality or divided into several separate sub-components,and any one or more middle layers, such as a management layer, may beprovided to communicatively couple to such sub-components in order toprovide integrated functionality. Any components described in thisdisclosure may also interact with one or more other components notspecifically described in this disclosure but known by those of skill inthe art.

In addition, while a particular feature of the subject innovation mayhave been disclosed with respect to only one of several implementations,such feature may be combined with one or more other features of theother implementations as may be desired and advantageous for any givenor particular application. Furthermore, to the extent that the terms“includes,” “including,” “has,” “contains,” variants thereof, and othersimilar words are used in either the detailed description or the claims,these terms are intended to be inclusive in a manner similar to the term“comprising” as an open transition word without precluding anyadditional or other elements.

As used in this application, the terms “component,” “module,” “system,”or the like are generally intended to refer to a computer-relatedentity, either hardware (e.g., a circuit), a combination of hardware andsoftware, software, or an entity related to an operational machine withone or more specific functionalities. For example, a component may be,but is not limited to being, a process running on a processor (e.g.,digital signal processor), a processor, an object, an executable, athread of execution, a program, and/or a computer. By way ofillustration, both an application running on a controller and thecontroller can be a component. One or more components may reside withina process and/or thread of execution and a component may be localized onone computer and/or distributed between two or more computers. Further,a “device” can come in the form of specially designed hardware;generalized hardware made specialized by the execution of softwarethereon that enables the hardware to perform specific function; softwarestored on a computer readable storage medium; software transmitted on acomputer readable transmission medium; or a combination thereof.

Moreover, the words “example” or “exemplary” are used in this disclosureto mean serving as an example, instance, or illustration. Any aspect ordesign described in this disclosure as “exemplary” is not necessarily tobe construed as preferred or advantageous over other aspects or designs.Rather, use of the words “example” or “exemplary” is intended to presentconcepts in a concrete fashion. As used in this application, the term“or” is intended to mean an inclusive “or” rather than an exclusive“or”. That is, unless specified otherwise, or clear from context, “Xemploys A or B” is intended to mean any of the natural inclusivepermutations. That is, if X employs A; X employs B; or X employs both Aand B, then “X employs A or B” is satisfied under any of the foregoinginstances. In addition, the articles “a” and “an” as used in thisapplication and the appended claims should generally be construed tomean “one or more” unless specified otherwise or clear from context tobe directed to a singular form.

Computing devices typically include a variety of media, which caninclude computer-readable storage media and/or communications media, inwhich these two terms are used in this description differently from oneanother as follows. Computer-readable storage media can be any availablestorage media that can be accessed by the computer, is typically of anon-transitory nature, and can include both volatile and nonvolatilemedia, removable and non-removable media. By way of example, and notlimitation, computer-readable storage media can be implemented inconnection with any method or technology for storage of information suchas computer-readable instructions, program modules, structured data, orunstructured data. Computer-readable storage media can include, but arenot limited to, RAM, ROM, EEPROM, flash memory or other memorytechnology, CD-ROM, digital versatile disk (DVD) or other optical diskstorage, magnetic cassettes, magnetic tape, magnetic disk storage orother magnetic storage devices, or other tangible and/or non-transitorymedia which can be used to store desired information. Computer-readablestorage media can be accessed by one or more local or remote computingdevices, e.g., via access requests, queries or other data retrievalprotocols, for a variety of operations with respect to the informationstored by the medium.

On the other hand, communications media typically embodycomputer-readable instructions, data structures, program modules orother structured or unstructured data in a data signal that can betransitory such as a modulated data signal, e.g., a carrier wave orother transport mechanism, and includes any information delivery ortransport media. The term “modulated data signal” or signals refers to asignal that has one or more of its characteristics set or changed insuch a manner as to encode information in one or more signals. By way ofexample, and not limitation, communication media include wired media,such as a wired network or direct-wired connection, and wireless mediasuch as acoustic, RF, infrared and other wireless media.

In view of the exemplary systems described above, methodologies that maybe implemented in accordance with the described subject matter will bebetter appreciated with reference to the flowcharts of the variousfigures. For simplicity of explanation, the methodologies are depictedand described as a series of acts. However, acts in accordance with thisdisclosure can occur in various orders and/or concurrently, and withother acts not presented and described in this disclosure. Furthermore,not all illustrated acts may be required to implement the methodologiesin accordance with certain aspects of this disclosure. In addition,those skilled in the art will understand and appreciate that themethodologies could alternatively be represented as a series ofinterrelated states via a state diagram or events. Additionally, itshould be appreciated that the methodologies disclosed in thisdisclosure are capable of being stored on an article of manufacture tofacilitate transporting and transferring such methodologies to computingdevices. The term article of manufacture, as used in this disclosure, isintended to encompass a computer program accessible from anycomputer-readable device or storage media.

What is claimed is:
 1. A system, comprising: a media provider device that receives a signal over a network, the media provider device including a memory that stores computer executable components and a processor that executes at least the following computer executable components stored in the memory: an interface component configured to provide a user interface that allows a first user to provide feedback regarding videos watched by a second user; an access component configured to provide the first user access, via the user interface, to a watch history of the second user, wherein the watch history includes one or more videos watched by the second user; a review component configured to receive, in response to input at the user interface, feedback from the first user regarding a video included in the watch history of the second user, the feedback based at least in part on an educational level of the second user and indicating whether the video is appropriate for viewing by the second user; and a general rating component configured to infer an age appropriateness rating and an educational appropriateness rating to associate with the video based on the feedback received from the first user via the user interface.
 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the age appropriateness rating is inferred based on an age of the second user.
 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the feedback is further based on at least one of: violence, profanity or vulgarity associated with content of the video.
 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the general rating component is further configured to infer the age appropriateness rating for the video based collective feedback received from a plurality of supervisory users indicating appropriateness of the video for a plurality of other users, respectively, and respective ages of the plurality of other users.
 5. The system of claim 1, further comprising: a recommendation component configured to recommend the video to a third user for watching based on the age appropriateness rating and an age of the third user.
 6. The system of claim 1, further comprising: a personalized rating component configured to determine a personalized rating for the video that reflects a degree of appropriateness of the video for viewing by a third user based on the feedback, a profile of the third user, and a profile of the second user.
 7. The system of claim 6, wherein the personalized rating component is further configured to determine the personalized rating for the video based collective feedback received from a plurality of supervisory users regarding appropriateness of the video for a plurality of other users, respectively, and respective profiles of the plurality of other users.
 8. The system of claim 6, wherein the profile of the third user and the profile of the second user includes information identifying at least one of: user gender, user ethnicity, user culture, user religion, or user geographic location, the system further comprising: a recommendation component configured to recommend the video to the third user in response to the personalized rating being greater than or equal to a threshold rating.
 9. The system of claim 6, wherein the profile of the third user and the profile of the second user includes information identifying at least one of: degree of user tolerance to violence in content, degree of user tolerance to profanity in content, or degree of user tolerance to vulgarity in content, the system further comprising: a recommendation component configured to recommend the video to the third user in response to the personalized rating being greater than or equal to a threshold rating.
 10. The system of claim 6, further comprising: a context component configured to determine one or more contextual factors associated with watching of the video by the third user, and wherein the personalized rating component is configured to determine the personalized rating of the video based on the one or more contextual factors.
 11. The system of claim 10, wherein the one or more contextual factors can include a type of device at which the third user will watch the video, a time of day, a location of the third user, and movement of the third user.
 12. The system of claim 10, wherein the personalized rating component is configured to determine the personalized rating of the video based on the one or more contextual factors and feedback information received from a plurality of users regarding appropriateness of the video for watching with respect to various contextual factors.
 13. A method comprising: using a media provider device that receives a signal over a network and a processor to execute the following computer executable instructions stored in a memory to perform the following acts: providing a user interface that allows a first user to provide feedback regarding videos watched by a second user; providing the first user access, via the user interface, to a watch history of the second user, wherein the watch history includes one or more videos watched by the second user; receiving, in response to input at the user interface, feedback from the first user regarding a video included in the watch history of the second user, the feedback based at least in part on an educational level of the second user and indicating whether the videos are appropriate for viewing by the second user; and inferring an age appropriateness rating and an educational appropriateness rating to associate with the video based on the feedback received from the first user via the user interface.
 14. The method of claim 13, further comprising: recommending the video to a third user for watching based on the age appropriateness rating and an age of the third user.
 15. The method of claim 13, further comprising: determining a personalized rating for the video that reflects a degree of appropriateness of the video for viewing by a third user based on the feedback, a profile of the third user, and a profile of the second user; and recommending the video to the third user in response to the personalized rating being greater than or equal to a threshold rating.
 16. The method of claim 15, wherein the profile of the third user and the profile of the second user includes information identifying at least one of: user gender, user ethnicity, user culture, user religion, or user geographic location.
 17. The method of claim 13, further comprising: determining a personalized rating for the video that reflects a degree of appropriateness of the video for viewing by a third user based on the feedback, a profile of the third user, a profile of the second user, a profile of the first user and a profile of a fourth user having a supervisory role over the third user; and recommending the video to the third user in response to the personalized rating being greater than or equal to a threshold rating.
 18. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising computer-readable instructions that, in response to execution, cause a computing system to perform operations, comprising: providing a user interface that allows a first user to provide feedback regarding videos watched by a second user; providing the first user access, via the user interface, to a watch history of the second user, wherein the watch history includes one or more videos watched by the second user; receiving, in response to input at the user interface, feedback from the first user regarding a video included in the watch history of the second user, the feedback based at least in part on an educational level of the second user and indicating whether the videos are appropriate for viewing by the second user; and inferring an age appropriateness rating and an educational appropriateness rating to associate with the video based on the feedback received from the first user via the user interface.
 19. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 18, the operations further comprising: determining a personalized rating for the video that reflects a degree of appropriateness of the video for viewing by a third user based on the feedback, a profile of the third user, a profile of the second user, a profile of the first user and a profile of a fourth user having a supervisory role over the third user; and recommending the video to the third user in response to the personalized rating being greater than or equal to a threshold rating. 